On Friday, May 1st, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the FDA must stop the dispensing of Mifepristone through the mail, and that the drug can only be dispensed in-person at a health center.
This ruling resulted from Louisiana v. the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), with Louisiana arguing that the FDA’s 2023 Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy (REMS) for Mifepristone was flawed. The REMS for Mifepristone, however, was the process the FDA used in deciding whether or not the drug could be sent via the mail. To be clear, Louisiana was not arguing that Mifepristone is unsafe (although I’d argue that they did try to insinuate this in their evidence,) but that the FDA’s decision making process was flawed and resulted in harm.
Before this ruling, patients could obtain Mifepristone from a pharmacy or by mail after an online telehealth appointment. (ACLU) This ruling takes away abortion access from millions of Americans, forcing patients to either travel to seek out in-person care, or go without completely.
As of today, May 4th, the Supreme Court has temporarily paused this ruling, ordering an administrative stay, and will decide how to move forward on May 11th. This means that for now, until at least May 11th, Mifepristone can still be sent through the mail. However, this does not mean SCOTUS will not side with the Fifth Circuit when they make their decision next week.
Mifepristone is not just used in abortion— it has several other uses as well, including but not limited to:
Learn more about how Mifepristone is used here.
If the Supreme Court does end up ruling in favor of the Fifth Circuit, the impacts will be devastating, not just for those seeking abortions, but for those with health conditions that use mifepristone as a treatment. Mifepristone is proven to be safe and effective, and it is clear that the true motivation behind the Fifth Circuit Court’s decision is to further restrict abortion.
This is yet another attack on reproductive rights from a federal court, and regardless of how SCOTUS decides to rule on this matter, we must continue to pay attention to the legal strategies being used at all levels to target bodily freedom.
